Re: [PATCH V4 2/3] Revert "x86, efivars: firmware bug workarounds should be in platform code"

[Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@nebula.com>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8", Size: 1011 bytes --]

On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 14:24 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On 10/04/13 18:46, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > This reverts commit a6e4d5a03e9e3587e88aba687d8f225f4f04c792. Doing this
> > workaround properly requires us to work within the variable code.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@nebula.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c | 25 -------------------------
> >  drivers/firmware/efivars.c  | 18 +++++++++++++++---
> >  include/linux/efi.h         |  9 +--------
> >  3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
> 
> Does it really? Why can't you just hook into the get_next_variable() and
> set_variable() functions in arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c?

struct efi_variable isn't exported from efivars.c, and chunks of the
workaround need to be called at efivars init anyway.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
ÿôèº{.nÇ+‰·Ÿ®‰­†+%ŠËÿ±éݶ\x17¥Šwÿº{.nÇ+‰·¥Š{±þG«éÿŠ{ayº\x1dʇڙë,j\a­¢f£¢·hšïêÿ‘êçz_è®\x03(­éšŽŠÝ¢j"ú\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿ¾\a«þG«éÿ¢¸?™¨è­Ú&£ø§~á¶iO•æ¬z·švØ^\x14\x04\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿÃ\fÿ¶ìÿ¢¸?–I¥